This proposal was partly discussed in this post: how-do-deleted-posts-affect-rep, but the only solution to update the rep after a post is deleted seems to be a complete recalculation.

I am wondering whether this is technically necessary. I think it would be more convenient for users if they got a hint before deletion how many rep they'd lose from this post. If they choose to delete it the effect should be instant. I have worked on denormalization strategies myself and have never seen the need to do a complete recalculation if the denormalized data is updated correctly.

I think we should try to keep the currency "reputation" as solid as possible and avoid fluctuations altogether (besides rule changes, which I do strongly support).

Another part of the problem is how deleting posts with down-votes should work, I don't think reputation should be regained. If everything is only soft-deleted anyway this wouldn't cause any additional headaches during recalculations.


2 Answers 2


Sounds good to me, but I think that reputation should be regained for deleted posts with downvotes - you were wrong, have (hopefully) realised your mistake, and have removed it. Shouldn't that behaviour be encouraged?

This might not be appropriate if you (the person who wrote the downvoted answer) didn't personally delete the question (e.g. a mod deleted it).

I'd agree more for things flagged offensive/spam, since you've presumably done something actively detrimental to the community.

  • 1
    My reading of "Questions and answers sometimes get deleted; votes on deleted posts do not count toward your reputation." (blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/03/…) is that deleted downvotes no longer count against you either (just like upvotes no longer help you), no matter who deletes the post.
    – Gnome
    Commented Mar 22, 2010 at 14:14
  • @Gnome - yep, I'm just saying that should remain the case. Commented Mar 22, 2010 at 14:29

The variable here is hitting the rep-cap on a given day.

If you hit the rep cap, the effects of deleting a post depend on timing, and have to be calculated by walking the entire vote history.

For example, deleting a post could mean you don't hit the cap on that day, whereas with the post, you do.

  • 7
    You make it sound like that walk is huge though -- but (when a user's post is deleted, or when a vote is retracted) it should only be necessary to revisit all votes made to that user's posts for that one day.
    – Ether
    Commented Mar 22, 2010 at 23:40
  • 1
    @Jeff: I agree with Ether on this topic. This operation shouldn't be all too expensive and could be easily handed of to a background job or whatever. Commented Mar 26, 2010 at 10:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .